References about $cientology


The full text is available from the F.A.C.T.Net archives, e.g. from the Netherlands .

"The purpose of a lawsuit is to harass and discourage rather than to win....Don't ever defend. Always attack. Find or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace. Originate a black PR campaign to destroy the person's repute and to discredit them so thoroughly they will be ostracized. Be alert to sue for slander at the slightest chance so as to discourage the public presses from mentioning Scientology."

"It is my specific intention that by the use of professional PR [black PR) tactics any opposition not only be dulled but permanently iradicated." From a confidential Board Policy Letter of 30 may 1974 Handling Hostile Agents/Dead Agenting.

"Threat and mystery are the lot of intelligence." From HCO Policy Letter of 11 May 1971.

"The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, will knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly." From "A Manual on the Dissemination of Material" (1955) by L. Ron Hubbard.

Extract from memorandum of the US court of appeals for the ninth circuit of April 11th 1996.

pages 6 - 7, plaintif is co$

3. The past 8 years have consisted mainly of a prolonged, and ultimately unsuccessful, attempt to persuade or compel the plaintiff to comply with lawful discovery. These efforts have been fiercely resisted by plaintiffs. They have utilized every device that we on the District Court have ever heard of to avoid such compliance, and some that are new to us.

4. This noncompliance has consisted of evasions, misrepresentations, broken promises and lies, but ultimately with refusal. As part of this scheme to not comply, the plaintiffs have undertaken a massive campaign of filing every conceivable motion (and some inconceivable) to disguise the true issue in these pretrial proceedings. Apparently viewing litigation as war, plaintiffs by this tactic have had the effect of massively increasing the costs to the other parties, and, for a while, to the Court. The appointment of the Special Master 4 years ago has considerably relieved the burden to this Court. The scope of plaintiff's efforts have to be seen. to be believed. (See Exhibit "A", photo of clerk with filings, and Exhibit "B", copy of clerk's docket with 81 pages and 1,737 filings.)

5. Yet it is all puffery -- motions without merit or substance. Notwithstanding this, I have carefully monitored the Special Master's handling of these motions. I saw no need to try to improve on the Special Master's writings if I agreed with the reasons and the results. However, with respect to the major ruling that I have made during these proceedings, the dismissal of the plaintiff's claims, the following occurred:

6. The Special Master, after years of efforts to compel compliance with discovery, purported to order a dismissal of plaintiff's claims. Although the action was probably long overdue, the Special Master did not have the authority to make such a dispositive order. In reviewing his order, as I did with all of his actions, I saw what he had done and did not approve it. I treated the Special Master's 'order" as a recommendation and gave notice to the parties that they could have a hearing and invited briefs. Only after considering fully the briefs of the parties did I give approval to the dismissal. It is true that I adopted the language chosen by the Special Master, but that was because I fully agreed with his reasoning and saw no need to write further. Judge Ideman's pointed and pungent review of the record is the reverse of a rubber stamp. It is the judge's own heartfelt appraisal of the plaintiffs' actions as meriting dismissal. RTC's claim of violation of the Constitution by unconstitutional delegation fails.

Send mail to Jens Tingleff (
Last modified: Mon Nov 11 15:32:18 MET 1996